초록
While there is a high degree of convergence in linguistics in the treatment of the progressive as an aspect, the English progressive is unusually wide in its range of uses. This paper highlights the distinction between aspectual and non-aspectual progressives. The primary function of the progressive is to present a situation as ongoing, and this strictly aspectual use of the progressive is referred to as ‘aspectual progressive’. On the other hand, the uses of the English progressive that are not, in a strict sense, aspectual is called ‘non-aspectual progressive’. There are at least three basic uses of non-aspectual progressives. The first is the so-called progressive futurate (e.g., John is leaving tomorrow). In English, the present progressive can be used to express future time reference. This use of the progressive is regarded as a non-aspectual one, on the grounds that its meaning cannot be accounted for in terms of ongoingness. The second use is the habitual progressive (e.g., She’s smoking a lot these days). Given that the habitual is an aspect, it is natural that the habitual progressive is not an aspectual progressive because one cannot view a situation in two different ways. In addition, ongoingness is not a defining property of the habitual progressive but is only a contingent or subsidiary property. The real essence of the habitual progressive is habituality. The third use of non-aspectual progressives is the experiential or interpretative progressive (e.g., You’re imagining things), whose main characteristic is the subjectivity of the speaker’s interpretation. The experiential or interpretative progressive does not serve a primarily aspectual function because the meaning of ongoingness has nothing to do with the content of the utterance.
키워드
aspectual progressive, non-aspectual progressive, progressive futurate, habitual progressive, experiential progressive, interpretative progressive
I. Introduction
While there is a high degree of convergence in linguistics in the treatment of the progressive as an aspect, the English progressive is unusually wide in its range of uses. It is, therefore, illuminating to distinguish ‘aspectual’ progressives, which involve a universal or near-universal notion of aspect, from ‘non-aspectual’ progressives, which reflect a parochial feature of English. Of these two, the main focus of the present paper is on the latter.
The motivation of this paper stems from the fact that in some ESL/EFL (English as a second/foreign language) grammar books, the progressive has been mistakenly described as a tense, as summarized in
Table 1. Examples of ESL/EFL Grammar Books Describing the Progressive as a Tense
II. Background
This paper accepts S. Pit Corder’s view of applied linguistics, namely as mediator between linguistics and language teaching:
(1) a. Applied linguistics is a set of related activities or techniques mediating between the various theoretical accounts of human language on the one hand and the practical activities of language teaching on the other.
b. The starting point of every application of linguistics to any of the practical tasks is a description of the language or languages involved in the task. . . . In the case of language teaching it is true to say that we cannot teach systematically what we cannot describe.
Following
A pedagogic (or pedagogical) grammar we can define as a grammatical description of a language which is intended for pedagogical purposes, such as language teaching [in the narrow sense, SAL], syllabus design, or the preparation of teaching materials.
The ultimate goal of this study is bridging the gap between theoretical linguistics and descriptive and pedagogical linguistic activities. The legacy of crossing boundaries in these two seemingly disparate areas can be traced back to the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, as noted by
All the great linguists and phoneticians of the 19th and early 20th centuries (Sweet, Whitney, Sapir, Jespersen, Bloomfield, Jones, . . .) seem to have taken it for granted that linguistics was, and ought to be, a companion to the making of dictionaries and the teaching of languages.
Having sympathy with this point of view, this paper aims to narrow the existing gap between theoretical linguistics and descriptive and pedagogical linguistic activities. Given this background, this study will be of relevance for both linguists and English language professionals such as ESL/EFL textbook writers or English language teachers, who need a comprehensive understanding of English progressive constructions.
III. Aspectual versus Non-aspectual Progressives
For a long time there was no consensus among linguists with respect to the general grammatical status of the progressive in English.
The study of aspect in English has given rise to many controversial issues of which the more tangled are the term ‘aspect’ itself and its companion term ‘Aktionsart.’
The distinction between aspect and Aktionsart has been approached from many different directions, as shown in
Table 2. Aspect versus Aktionsart
The traditional view is that aspect is grammatical while Aktionsart is lexical in English
With this background, let us now turn to the question of what counts as the progressive aspect.
(2) a. As the name suggests, the progressive presents the situation as being ‘in progress’.
b. As its name suggests, the progressive aspect indicates a happening ‘in progress’ at a given time.
c. [P]rogressive aspect views a situation as ongoing or developing and as being continuous and incomplete in the time frame considered.
d. The progressive aspect designates an event or state of affairs which is in progress, or continuing, at the time indicated by the rest of the verb phrase.
e. A special case of imperfectivity . . . is that where a dynamic situation is presented as ongoing, in progress: this we refer to as progressive aspectuality, and since it is the basic function of the
In a nutshell, the primary function of the progressive is to present a situation as ongoing. We will refer to this strictly aspectual use of the progressive as ‘aspectual progressive.’
There are, however, other cases of the progressive in which the meaning of ongoingness (i.e., the ‘process’ element of meaning) is lacking, or to put it less categorically, not salient, as will be argued at some length in sections IV - VI below. The examples in (3) offer just a glimpse into the multiplicity of uses that English progressive constructions have. Compare (3b-c) with (3a), which is the aspectual progressive or the progressive proper.
(3) a.
b. We’re bombing a French mission
c.
The uses of the English progressive that are not, in a strict sense, aspectual will be called ‘non-aspectual progressive.’
3 The term ‘aspect’ corresponds to the Russian word vid ‘view’
4 See, however,
5 One might argue that Aktionsart also concerns the addition of a subjective element. This line of thinking is summarized in the following passage: In a certain sense, [A]ktionsart is as ‘subjective’ as aspect. That is, in order to name a situation, a speaker must conceptualize that situation in a particular way. Different speakers may choose to conceptualize the same situation differently.
6 The progressive aspect is sometimes called the ‘durative’ or ‘continuous’ aspect
7 Throughout this paper, the term ‘progressive aspect’ will be reserved for aspectual progressives only, while ‘progressive construction’ (
8 Not only the examples in (3) but also the corresponding descriptions in the brackets (including the word ‘futurate’) are repeated from
9 Since the aspectual/non-aspectual distinction largely depends on how one defines the progressive aspect, there is, naturally, room for disagreement on the classification of a particular use as non-aspectual.
IV. The Progressive Futurate10
As the examples in (4) illustrate, one of the striking properties of English is that the present progressive as well as the simple present can be used to express future time reference.
(4) a. John leaves tomorrow.
b. John is leaving tomorrow.
In this respect, English differs from other languages with a grammatical progressive such as Spanish. For example, Spanish does not permit (5b), otherwise parallel to (5a), even if it allows a future use of the simple present.
(5) a. I’m leaving in five minutes.
b. *Me estoy yendo [e]n cinco minutos.
This use of the progressive is regarded as a non-aspectual one
Although in (4), it is difficult to pin down the difference in meaning between the non-progressive and the progressive
(6) a. It expires tomorrow/in five years.
b. It’s expiring tomorrow/in five years.
In sum, “the progressive tends to be used for the relatively near future”
Another restriction imposed on “the ‘futurate’ use”
(7) a. The sun rises at 5.15 tomorrow.
b. *The sun is rising at 5.15 tomorrow.
(8) John is rising at 5 o’clock tomorrow.
Finally, it is worth digressing to consider progressive constructions that are related to the case at hand but cannot be treated under the heading ‘progressive futurate.’ As the examples in (9) indicate, the aspectual/nonaspectual distinction is found not only in present progressives but also in ‘future progressives’ (
(9) a. When we get there, they’
b.
c. When the meeting ends we’
(
Whereas (9a) means that “the lunch will be still in progress at the time of our arrival,” this sort of interpretation is not possible in (9b), where the progressive just indicates that “the matter has already been settled rather than being subject to decision now”
10 The term ‘progressive futurate’ is taken from
11
12 The judgement in (7b) is not repeated from
13 The salient interpretation of the non-progressive counterpart of (9b),
V. The Habitual Progressive
In English, the present progressive may express not only futurity but also habituality. For illustration, consider (3), repeated below as (10).
(10) a.
b. We’re bombing a French mission
c.
(
Given that habits are generally expressed in English by the simple present, as the examples in (11) show, a natural question arises as to whether there is any difference between the habitual progressive and its non-progressive counterpart.
(11) a. I buy my shirts at Harrods.
b. She visits Europe frequently.
c. John often/usually sings.
There are at least two distinctive features of the habitual progressive. First, habitual progressives with adverbs such as
(12) a. She always buys far more vegetables than they can possibly eat.
b. She’s always buying far more vegetables than they can possibly eat.
(13) a. They always play chess.
b. They are always playing chess.
(14) a. I know a man who always gives his wife expensive presents.
b. I know a man who’s always giving his wife expensive presents.
According to
(15) a. ‘I know a man who gives his wife an expensive present on every occasion (i.e., on every occasion when husbands normally give wives presents).’
b. ‘There is never a time at which this man is not giving his wife expensive presents.’
In sum,
Notice also that habitual progressives of this sort have an “emotional colouring”
[T]heir tone is often one of irritation or amused disparagement. Anyone who used a sentence about
A second sort of characteristic is that habits in the progressive may refer to temporary habits, or those holding for a limited period, as the following examples indicate:
(16) a. We’re going to the opera a lot these days.
b. She’s smoking a lot these days.
c. I’m taking dancing lessons this winter.
Even when there is no adverbial like
(17) a. I take dancing lessons.
b. I’m taking dancing lessons.
This contrast is also exemplified by the near-minimal pair in (18).
(18) a. She walks to work.
b. Mr. Robinson is cycling to work until his car is repaired.
With regard to (18b), it is perhaps worth mentioning that
(19) She is cycling to work this week.
However, this seems to be a misconceived strategy, given that states and habits should not be lumped together. As
(20) ‘Perhaps she normally goes by car, but this week it is off the road, so she is going by bicycle.’
Admittedly, there is a tendency to equate habits with states, as evinced by Kearns’s (1991: 110) statement that “habituals are plausibly classed as a kind of stative.”
In this connection, it must be emphasized that the habitual is an aspect category rather than an Aktionsart category
Figure 1. Comrie’s (1976: 25) Classification of Aspectual Oppositions
Table 3. Brinton’s (1988) Aspect Model for English
For the purposes of this study, it is not necessary to take a position about whether the habitual should be considered to be a subcategory of the imperfective or not. Suffice it to say that the habitual is an aspect, or way of viewing a situation. Given that the habitual is an aspect, it is natural that the habitual progressive is not an aspectual progressive because one cannot view a situation in two different ways.
Presumably one might refute this claim by saying that in the habitual progressive, “habits, which are not continuous, are represented as if continuous”
Turning to the distributional constraints on the habitual progressive, there is not much discussion on this issue.
14 See the references cited in
15 Consequently,
16 Similar remarks are made by Vendler (1957/1967: 108), who notes that “[h]abits (in a broader sense including occupations, dispositions, abilities, and so forth) are also states in our sense.” Others use expressions such as ‘habitual state’
VI. The Experiential or Interpretative Progressive
(21) a. You’re telling me you don’t love me anymore.
b. You’re imagining things.
The progressives in (21) “signpost the speaker’s interpretation or evaluation of some state of affairs” and hence are subjectively construed
While the experiential or interpretative progressive has been discussed in the linguistics literature, including
(22) Prince Charming becomes frustrated, he turns Pinocchio’s head towards him.
PRINCE CHARMING
You! You can’t lie. So tell me
puppet... Where is Shrek?!
Pinocchio thinks.
PINOCCHIO
(nervous)
Well, I don’t know where he’s not.
Prince Charming gets in Pinocchio’s face.
Pinocchio is still a little nervous.
It wouldn’t be inaccurate to assume
that I couldn’t exactly not say
that is or isn’t almost partially
incorrect.
Pinocchio thinks he has the upper hand.
So you do know where he is!
On the contrary, I’m possibly more
or less, not definitely rejecting
the idea, that in no way, with any
amount of uncertainty that...
Stop it.
PINOCCHIO (CONT’D)
. . . I undeniably do or do not know
where he shouldn’t probably be.
(COCA; FIC, 2007)
(23) Thus far, however, men found her unattractive and annoyingly intellectual. Mr. Higgins, at least, seemed to find her interesting. This was a first for Lucy, and she didn’t want to let the opportunity slip away. “You’re looking at me like a cat in the creamery,” he whispered. “Why is that?” She snapped her head around and faced front, appalled by her own intoxicating fantasy. “
In (22)-(23), the subjective function or meaning of the progressive is clear because the progressive construction provides an interpretation of the speaker’s perspective of the situation.
Notice that the experiential or interpretative progressive does not serve a primarily aspectual function. The meaning of ongoingness does “not belong to the content of the utterance but to the speaker’s progressively developing belief state”
(24) What’s John doing just now?
(25) He’s imagining things.
(26) He’s reading the paper.
17 Alternative terms for the experiential or interpretative progressive include ‘emotive,’ ‘vivid,’ and ‘phenomenal’ progressive
18 The COCA is freely accessible online at
19 The examples in (24)-(26) are all drawn from
VII. Summary and Conclusion
“To mistakenly describe the progressive as a tense”
One can distinguish at least three basic uses of non-aspectual progressives. The first is the so-called progressive futurate (e.g.,
It is hoped that the findings from the present study are relevant for ESL/EFL textbook writers as well as linguists. The following passage suggests that in
The progressive aspect is used to describe activities or events that are in progress at a particular time, usually for a limited duration. The present progressive aspect describes events that are currently in progress or
However, as has been stressed in the preceding discussion, aspectual progressives should be distinguished from non-aspectual progressives.
20 An advantage of the classification adopted in this paper is that the distributional constraints on English progressives (namely, the claim that state verbs and achievement verbs do not allow the progressive) applies to aspectual progressives only. Space considerations preclude a detailed discussion on the distribution of English aspectual progressives. For details, see
참고문헌(55)
-
[단행본]
1988
Longman English Grammar
Longman
-
[단행본]
2002
Understanding and Using English Grammar
Longman
3rd ed.
-
[단행본]
1981
“On Time, Tense, and Aspect: An Essay in English Metaphysics.” Radical Pragmatics. Ed. Peter Cole
63
Academic Press
-
[참고문헌]
(1994)
“Statives, Progressives, and Habituals: Analogies and Differences.”
Linguistics 32 : 391 - 423
10.1515/ling.1994.32.3.391
-
[단행본]
1999
Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English
Longman
-
[단행본]
1991
Time and the Verb: A Guide to Tense and Aspect
Oxford UP
-
[참고문헌]
(1987)
“The Aspectual Nature of States and Habits.”
Folia Linguistica 21 : 195 - 214
10.1515/flin.1987.21.2-4.195
-
[단행본]
1988
The Development of English Aspectual Systems: Aspectualizers and Post-Verbal Particles
Cambridge UP
-
[참고문헌]
(1988)
“Applied Linguistics and Communicative Language Teaching.”
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 8 : 3 - 13
10.1017/S0267190500000982
-
[단행본]
2000
Exploring Grammar in Context: Upper-Intermediate and Advanced
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
1976
Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
1973
Introducing Applied Linguistics
Penguin
-
[단행본]
1975
“Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching.” Papers in Applied Linguistics (The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics 2). Eds. J. P. B. Allen and S. Pit Corder
1
Oxford UP
-
[단행본]
1981
“On the Definition of the Telic-Atelic (Bounded-Nonbounded) Distinction.” Tense and Aspect (Syntax and Semantics 14 ). Eds. Philip J. Tedeschi and Annie Zaenen
79
Academic Press
-
[단행본]
1999
An Introduction to Applied Linguistics: From Practice to Theory
Edinburgh UP
-
[단행본]
1979
Word Meaning and Montague Grammar: The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ
Reidel
-
[단행본]
2005
Oxford Learner’s Grammar: Grammar Finder
Oxford UP
-
[단행본]
1999
Aspect, Eventuality Types and Nominal Reference
Garland
-
[단행본]
1979
The Semantics of English Aspectual Complementation
Reidel
-
[단행본]
1984
The Logic of Aspect: An Axiomatic Approach
Clarendon Press
-
[참고문헌]
(1982)
“The Logic of the English Progressive.”
Linguistic Inquiry 13 : 79 - 89
-
[단행본]
2003
Grammar for English Exams
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
2005
Advanced Grammar in Use
Cambridge UP
2nd ed.
-
[단행본]
1984
Introduction to the Grammar of English
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
2002
“The Verb.” The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum
71
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
1924
The Philosophy of Grammar
George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
-
[단행본]
1931
A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part IV: Syntax (Third Volume)
Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung
-
[단행본]
1933
Essentials of English Grammar
George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
-
[단행본]
2000
Aspect in English: A “Common-Sense” View of the Interplay between Verbal and Nominal Referents
Kluwer Academic Publishers
-
[학위논문]
“The Semantics of the English Progressive.”
1991
MIT / Diss.
-
[참고문헌]
(2004)
“Subjectivity and the English Progressive.”
English Language and Linguistics 8 : 25 - 46
10.1017/S1360674304001236
-
[단행본]
1998
Introducing English Semantics
Routledge
-
[단행본]
2004
“Progressives and Aspectual Verb Constructions in English.”
Diss. U of Cambridge
-
[단행본]
1987
Meaning and the English Verb
Longman
2nd ed.
-
[단행본]
1980
Reflections on the English Progressive (Gothenburg Studies in English 46)
Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis
-
[참고문헌]
(1988)
“Temporal Ontology and Temporal Reference.”
Computational Linguistics 14 : 15 - 28
-
[단행본]
2002
“Theoretical Linguistics and Practical Concerns: Reflections on the Divorce.” Abstract for the Talk Given at the Department of Language and Linguistics
University of Essex
-
[단행본]
1985
A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language
Longman
-
[참고문헌]
(1981)
“Introducing the Progressive.”
TESOL Quarterly 15 : 391 - 402
10.2307/3586480
-
[단행본]
1973
“On the State of Progress on Progressives and Statives.” New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English. Ed. Charles-James N. Bailey and Roger W. Shuy
83
Georgetown UP
-
[참고문헌]
(1983)
“A Theory of Aspectual Choice.”
Language 59 : 479 - 501
10.2307/413899
-
[단행본]
1997
The Parameter of Aspect
Kluwer Academic Publishers
2nd ed.
-
[단행본]
2002
“Ever Moving on? The Progressive in Recent British English.” New Frontiers of Corpus Research (Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics 36). Eds. Pam Peters, Peter Collins, and Adam Smith
317
Rodopi
-
[단행본]
1892
A New English Grammar, Logical and Historical, Part I: Introduction, Phonology, and Accidence
Clarendon Press
-
[단행본]
1993
Aspect in the English Verb: Process and Result in Language
Longman
-
[단행본]
1967
“Verbs and Times.” The Philosophical Review 66 (1957): 143-60. Revised in Zeno Vendler, Linguistics in Philosophy
97
Cornell UP
-
[단행본]
1972
On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects
Reidel
-
[참고문헌]
(1989)
“Aspectual Classes and Aspectual Composition.”
Linguistics and Philosophy 12 : 39 - 94
10.1007/BF00627398
-
[단행본]
1993
A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Atemporal Structure
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
2007
Mosaic 2 Grammar
McGraw-Hill
-
[단행본]
1994
“The Mystery of the Modal Progressive.” Studies in Early Modern English. Ed. Dieter Kastovsky
467
Mouton de Gruyter
-
[단행본]
1995
“Subjectivity and Experiential Syntax.” Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives. Ed. Dieter Stein and Susan Wright
151
Cambridge UP
-
[단행본]
2006
Oxford Practice Grammar: Advanced
Oxford UP
-
[참고문헌]
(1962)
“Is ‘Aspect’ an English Verbal Category?”
Gothenburg Studies in English 14 : 1 - 20
-
[참고문헌]
(1999)
“Agentivity and the History of the English Progressive.”
Transactions of the Philological Society 97 : 51 - 101
10.1111/1467-968X.00045
1 S. Pit Corder was “an important innovator in the field” of applied linguistics, and was “largely responsible for the development in the UK of specialised courses in applied linguistics”(Davies 1999: 6) . Applied linguistics is a wideranging field and people interpret the term ‘applied linguistics’ differently. In fact, it has been “the subject of much argument about definition,” as Brumfit (1988: 3) , among others, notes.
2 This paper does not attend to classroom teaching. For some classroom activities concerning the English progressive, seeRichards (1981) and references cited therein.